Earlier, Syria talks with a fresh format but few fresh ideas opened in the Swiss lakeside town of Lausanne on Saturday[15 Oct], with US Secretary of State John Kerry seeking a new path to peace after failing to secure a ceasefire in direct talks with Russia.

Kerry hosted Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and seven foreign ministers from the region – from Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, Jordan and Egypt – three weeks after the collapse of a painstakingly crafted U.S.-Russian ceasefire plan that many saw as the last hope for peace this year.

Lavrov has said he has “no special expectations” for Saturday’s[15 Oct] meeting. A senior US State Department official said he foresaw no major announcement at the end of the day.

“This is going to be, as it has been now for several years, a very difficult process,” the US official said.

Europe is not represented at the meeting being held in a luxury hotel on Lake Geneva. But France’s Foreign Ministry confirmed that foreign ministers of like-minded nations plan to meet to discuss Syria in London on Sunday[16 Oct].

Since the breakdown of US-Russia cooperation, long the backbone of efforts to end the war in Syria, US officials have worked on a number of ideas, and although no breakthrough is expected, the regional format could be the basis of a new process, the US official said.

A Western diplomat in Lausanne said the meeting appeared ill-prepared and vague in its goals, and the list of invitees clarified only at the last moment.

“If it is to reach an agreement on Aleppo, countries have to make commitments: Russia to stop bombing, Iran to withdraw its militia on the ground supporting Damascus” the diplomat told Reuters.

“That is a lot to obtain in half a day. Especially when people who are arriving are not happy with the format of the talks,” he said. “If this format is to be credible, Kerry has to come out of the talks tonight saying we got something for Aleppo. A ceasefire would be credible.”

Before the talks started, Kerry met separately with his Saudi counterpart Adel al-Jubeir and with Lavrov to discuss the logistics of the meeting.

It was the first meeting between Kerry and Lavrov since the collapse of a second attempted ceasefire in September.

The US is expected to once again push Russia to agree to a ceasefire in Aleppo, and Russia is seen as insisting on separating moderate opposition groups from those it considers terrorists.

Accusations Pressure is rising for a halt to a ferocious, three-week-old Syrian government offensive to capture the rebel-held eastern zone of the city of Aleppo, where the United Nations says 275,000 civilians still live and 8,000 rebels are holding out against Syrian, Russian and Iranian-backed forces.

Western powers have accused Russia and Syria of committing atrocities by bombing hospitals, killing civilians and preventing medical evacuations, as well as targeting an aid convoy with the loss of around 20 lives.

Syria and Russia counter that they are only targeting militants in Aleppo and accuse the United States of breaking the ceasefire by bombing scores of Syrian troops fighting ISIS insurgents, over which the United States has expressed regret.

A senior rebel commander said on Friday[14 Oct] that Syrian government forces would never be able to capture Aleppo’s eastern sector, but a military source said the operation was going as planned.

The United Nations has said food, fuel and medicine are running out in eastern Aleppo and there will be no rations to distribute from the start of next month.

In a gesture of apparent desperation, UN Syria peace envoy Staffan de Mistura has offered to escort members of an Islamist militant group, Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, out of Aleppo if that would entice Damascus to forge a ceasefire with the remaining rebels.

Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov said Russia wants to discuss de Mistura’s offer, as well as elements of last month’s failed truce deal, namely humanitarian aid deliveries and a pullout of both sides’ troops from the Castello Road, a key supply route, he told Interfax news agency.

+++SOURCE:Al Arabiya News 15 Oct.’16:”How Al-Qaeda was born in a tiny office in New York”,by Suda Al-Halih SUBJECT:Al-Qaeda born in a tiny office in New York

QUOTE:”In 1986 Khaled Abu Al Thahab one of Al Qaeda’s members opened the group’s main branch in New York,Brooklyn”

FULL TEXT:Al-Qaeda’s late leader Osama Bin Laden and another founding member of the militant group, Abdullah Azzam, established in the 1980s Maktab al-Khadamat or the Office of Services in Pakistan to recruit an Islamic army to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.

The Soviet-Afghan War started in late 1979 and ended in 1989. The insurgent groups known as “the Mujahideen” fought against the Soviet Army and allied Afghan forces. During this period, Al-Qaeda saw its formative period during this time, with many of its members, arrived to Afghanistan from different countries including those from the Arab world.

With its main headquarters in Pakistan, the office, known later as Al-Kifah Refugees Center, became key for Al-Qaeda’s fundraising and recruitment. Many of its branches were later opened in US cities, reaching up to 33 branches.

Al-Qaeda’s first US office opened in Tucson city in Arizona in 1984.

In 1986, Khaled Abu Al-Thahab, one of Al-Qaeda’s members, opened the group’s main branch in the United States in New York’s Brooklyn.

Shalabi, a US citizen of Egyptian heritage, was in charge of the office in addition to two other aides: Mohammed Abu Halima, who was later accused for being involved in bombing the World Trade Center in 1993 in New York, and Al-Sayid Nasir, accused of killing a Jewish rabbi in New York in 1990.

One of Al-Qaeda’s letters – received by Alarabiya.net dating back to 2003 – stated that training was undertaken in Al-Kifah Center.

Mac Williams, an FBI agent, said the US embassy in the Afghan capital Kabul was involved in the recruitment of Arab fighters to fight the Soviets. Azzam, who was in charge of the recruitment at the time, established an Office of Services in Afghanistan in 1984. In one of his letters, Azzam said that he had opened an account in a bank and appointed Shalabi as the manager of the office.

The CIA was involved in the financing the Arab fighters in Afghanistan, according to one of the letters by Algerian Abdullah Anas.

Anas, who was a scholar, was the nom de guerre of a man who helped the Afghanistan Mujahideen fight the Soviet invasion in the northern provinces from 1983-1992.

Anas was worried about the conflict in Afghanistan and its repercussions on the Arab fighters, so he suggested the establishment of Office of Services in 1984.

Azzam used to go to the United States every year to attend conferences and lecture American Muslims about fighting in Afghanistan. It is worth mentioning that Anas – Azzam’s brother-in-law – left the Pakistani city of Peshawar and sought political asylum in Britain.

After Maktab al-Khadamat and the Kifah Refugees Center, Bin Laden established “Beit al-Ansar”. It was the main destination for those who wanted to get recruited and trained for fighting in Afghanistan.

The US officials were concerned about the growing radicalism between Arab and Afghan fighters. According to former CIA director and defense secretary, Robert Gates, the agency was vigilant regarding the Arab fighters who started to flow to Afghanistan from all over the world.

(This is an excerpt of translation of the article first published in the Arabic language website of Al Arabiya News Channel)

QUOTE:”Sisi:’the reforms are tough but unavoidable ahead of a $12billion International Monetary Fund loan to revive his country’s ailing economy”

Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has defended what he described as “tough but unavoidable” reforms ahead of a $12-billion International Monetary Fund loan to revive his country’s ailing economy.

“The reforms are tough but they’re unavoidable to save the economic situation,” Sisi said in an interview published on Saturday by state newspapers.

In exchange for the IMF loan, Egypt is expected to adopt drastic reforms to increase public revenues and reduce state subsidies, which make up 7.9 percent of government spending.

Sisi described a “programme for real reforms that aims to provide subsidies to those who deserve them and no one else”, promising “protection for those with low incomes”.

The former army chief, who became president in 2014 less than a year after toppling Islamist president Mohamed Morsi, also defended the army’s participation in large scale projects touted as part of the country’s recovery plan.

“The army is playing an important role in development but this role will diminish in the coming years when it will have finished its plan for the reconstruction of state infrastructures,” he said.

For decades, the military — which produced all but one president since 1952 — has played a key economic role, producing everything from washing machines to pasta, alongside building roads and operating gas stations.

The president also justified military spending including on two Mistral helicopter carriers from France on the need to defend a recently discovered gas field in Egypt’s territorial waters.

“We have gas fields more than 200 kilometres (125 miles) off our shores such as the Zohr field and others. We need to be able to secure and protect them,” he said.

Italian energy giant Eni in August announced the discovery of Zohr, the “largest ever” offshore natural gas field in the Mediterranean with a potential 30 trillion cubic feet (850 billion cubic metres) of gas in about 100 square kilometres (40 square miles).

“The cost of a Mistral is equivalent to one month’s revenues from the Zohr gas field,” Sisi said.

Egypt’s parliament in August passed a law on value added tax, one of the reforms promised in exchange for the IMF loan, to be set at 13 percent for 2016-17 and 14 percent for the following fiscal year.

The VAT replaces a sales tax of 10 percent, although the government says about 50 services and products will be exempt, including bread.

QUOTE:”Syria’s civil war, now in its sixth year, has killed 300,000 people and left millions homeless while dragging in regional and global powers”

FULL TEXT:Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad said on Friday[14Oct] that the Syrian army’s capture of Aleppo, which has come under renewed bombardment in an effort to seize its rebel-held sector, would be “a very important springboard” to pushing “terrorists” back to Turkey.

Rescue workers said that Syria’s military backed by Russian warplanes had killed more than 150 people in eastern Aleppo this week, in support of its offensive against the city.

Rising casualties in Aleppo, where many buildings have been reduced to rubble or are lacking roofs or walls, have prompted an international outcry and a renewed diplomatic push, with talks between the United States and Russia planned for Saturday.

“You have to keep cleaning this area and to push the terrorists to Turkey, to go back to where they come from or to kill them. There’s no other option,” Assad said in an interview with Russian tabloid Komsomolskaya Pravda.

“Aleppo is going to be a very important springboard to do this move,” added Assad.

As the air strikes and shelling of the city’s east intensified after a brief period of relative calm, Syria’s government approved a United Nations plan to allow aid convoys into the most besieged areas of Syria, with the exception of Aleppo.

Syria’s civil war, now in its sixth year, has killed 300,000 people and left millions homeless while dragging in regional and global powers as well as inspiring extremist attacks abroad.

QUOTE:”‘Tehran believes that the geopolitical chessboard of the Middle East is significantly changing, reasserting its hegemony’. (AFP)

FULL TEXT:Iran believes that the geopolitical chessboard of the Middle East is significantly changing, reasserting Iran’s hegemony, due to the lifting of sanctions, Iran’s improving ties with the Eastern and Western powers, as well as the geopolitical, strategic and economic tilt of Asian nations, Russia, Europe and the US towards Iran.

Iran also believes that the regional balance of power is significantly tipping in favor of Tehran. As a result, a fundamental shift in Iran’s policy toward Saudi Arabia is occurring because, from Iran’s perspective, a significant change in its policy toward Riyadh is a must at this critical juncture.

One critical indication of a fundamental shift in one of Iran’s domestic or foreign policies is when its political factions – across the political spectrum – join hands and are on the same page with regard to specific policy, not only privately behind closed doors, but also publicly.

This has happened with respect to Iran’s policy toward Saudi Arabia. Iran’s moderates (primarily led by Iran’s President Hassan Rowhani, foreign minister Javad Zarid and Rafsanjani) are totally and comprehensively on the same page with the hardliners (mainly Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Iran’s intelligence ministry, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, the conservative judiciary and the Basij) when it comes to portraying Saudi Arabia as Iran’s main enemy and increasing resentment towards Riyadh.

This fundamental shift highlights the fact that Tehran’s animosity toward Riyadh is not only tactical or temporary, but is strategic, geopolitical, religious, and an enduring one.

Iran needs an “enemy” to survive. This has been the foundational pillar of the Islamic Republic’s foreign policy since its establishment 1979. Directing hostility toward Saudi Arabia was the solution

Moderates join hardliners

One of the few policies in which the moderates and hardliners are totally on the same page, coalesce and find shared interests with the hardliners, is the Islamic Republic’s shifting policy toward Saudi Arabia.

When Rowhani came to power, he advocated for diplomatic initiatives and dialogue with other countries, in order to bring Iran out of political and economic isolation, which was endangering the hold on power.

Rowhani and Zarif followed this tactical shift toward many countries including Iran’s “Great Satan”, the United States, while the hardliners persisted on pursuing the same policies. Although in public, Rowhani and Zarif did not completely and comprehensively join the hardliners when it came to the US and Western powers, behind the close doors, they were on the same page.

However, Rouhani and Zarif soon changed their private and public agenda and policy toward one specific country: Saudi Arabia. The harsh rhetoric from Khamenei and the senior cadre of the IRGC has increased. In almost every speech, Khamenei is lashing out on Saudi Arabia.

Zarif and Rowhani joined the hardliners agenda. Rouhani’s speech at the 71st session of the United Nations General Assembly, his speeches in Iran, Zarif’s statements, his New York Times Op-ed, all reflect this shift in Iran’s policy toward Riyadh.

For several reasons, the moderates were more than delighted to join hardliners’ increasing hostility towards Saudi Arabia.

First of all, for the moderates, they needed another state actor to replace Iran’s Great State, the US. From their perspective, the moderates believe that rapprochement with US is necessary because it gives Iran global legitimacy.

It not only brings in more revenue through trade with US allies but also pressures Washington and its allies to turn a blind eye to Iran’s military adventurism in the region. Finally, it will strengthen the hold-on-power of the Islamic Republic’s political establishment.

This tactical shift regarding Iran-US ties – whereas the moderates show one face in the public and another behind closed doors – is essential for them to better serve their interests.

The bigger picture

The recent rapprochement and communications between Iranian politicians and their American counterparts was distorting the bigger picture that Washington is Iran’s “Great Satan”. Moderates were also being criticized by the hardliners for being soft on the US and for stripping the Islamic Republic of its powerful tool in having an “enemy”.

Iran needs an “enemy” to survive. This has been the foundational pillar of the Islamic Republic’s foreign policy since its establishment 1979. Directing hostility toward Saudi Arabia was the solution.

In addition, for Iran, labeling Saudi Arabia as Iran’s major enemy is a much more powerful tool. In order to unify its core against the “other”, Iran capitalizes on the ethnic differences (Arab versus Persian), on the sectarian platform (Sunni versus Shiite) and on geopolitical differences (Pro-Assad, pro Hezbollah, pro-Palestine versus the opposite).

This also allows the IRGC to crack down on the Sunni population of Iran or on the opposition by accusing them of being conspirators, allied with Saudi Arabia. Iran’s policy toward Saudi Arabia is fundamentally shifting due to the aforementioned reasons.

Iran’s narrative of who is its “major enemy” is changing as the moderates and hardliners join hands in their harsh policies, both publicly and privately, toward Riyadh. __________________________ Dr. Majid Rafizadeh, an Iranian-American political scientist and Harvard University scholar, is president of the International American Council. Rafizadeh serves on the board of Harvard International Review at Harvard University. He is also a member of the Gulf project at Columbia University. Rafizadeh served as a senior fellow at Nonviolence International Organization based in Washington DC. He has been a recipient of several scholarships and fellowship including from Oxford University, Annenberg University, University of California Santa Barbara, and Fulbright Teaching program. He served as ambassador for the National Iranian-American Council based in Washington DC, conducted research at Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and taught at University of California Santa Barbara through Fulbright Teaching Scholarship. He can be reached at Dr.rafizadeh@fas.harvard.edu, @Dr_Rafizadeh. ============ Sue Lerner – Associate, IMRA